Inspection on 25/10/06 for Birchgrove

This inspection was carried out on 25th October 2006.

CSCI has not published a star rating for this report, though using similar criteria we estimate that the report is Excellent. The way we rate inspection reports is consistent for all houses, though please be aware that this may be different from an official CSCI judgement.

The inspector made no statutory requirements on the home as a result of this inspection and there were no outstanding actions from the previous inspection report.

Other inspections for this house

Birchgrove 23/10/08

Birchgrove 27/10/05

Birchgrove 18/05/05

Birchgrove 08/12/04

Birchgrove 28/04/04

Similar services:

Hillside

Applegarth

122 Scorer Street

Jubilee Villa Care Home

Thornham Grove

Beech Lodge

8 Thorndale Road (Homefield College)

Hunter`s Lodge

Extracts from inspection reports are licensed from CQC, this page was updated on 08/07/2008.

CARE HOME ADULTS 18-65 Birchgrove 82 Lumsdale Road Matlock Derbyshire DE4 5NG Lead Inspector Tony Barker Key Unannounced Inspection 25th October 2006 10:10 Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 1 The Commission for Social Care Inspection aims to: • • • • Put the people who use social care first Improve services and stamp out bad practice Be an expert voice on social care Practise what we preach in our own organisation Reader Information Document Purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Inspection Report CSCI General Public 0870 240 7535 (telephone order line) This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI www.csci.org.uk Internet address Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 2 This is a report of an inspection to assess whether services are meeting the needs of people who use them. The legal basis for conducting inspections is the Care Standards Act 2000 and the relevant National Minimum Standards for this establishment are those for Care Homes for Adults 18-65. They can be found at www.dh.gov.uk or obtained from The Stationery Office (TSO) PO Box 29, St Crispins, Duke Street, Norwich, NR3 1GN. Tel: 0870 600 5522. Online ordering: www.tso.co.uk/bookshop This report is a public document. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the prior permission of the Commission for Social Care Inspection. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 3 SERVICE INFORMATION Name of service Birchgrove Address 82 Lumsdale Road Matlock Derbyshire DE4 5NG (01629) 584161 Telephone number Fax number Email address Provider Web address Name of registered provider(s)/company (if applicable) Name of registered manager (if applicable) Type of registration No. of places registered (if applicable) www.unitedresponse.org.uk United Response Mrs Deborah North Care Home 3 Category(ies) of Learning disability (3) registration, with number of places Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 4 SERVICE INFORMATION Conditions of registration: Date of last inspection 27th October 2005 Brief Description of the Service: Birchgrove is a bungalow situated in a residential area on the edge of Matlock. It blends in well with the surrounding properties. The Home provides a service for three people with learning disabilities and is run on domestic lines. Accommodation consists of 3 single bedrooms and there are also suitable bathroom/toilet facilities and lounge areas. There are spacious garden areas for the use of service users. The fees currently range from £1109 to £1827 per week. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 5 SUMMARY This is an overview of what the inspector found during the inspection. The time spent on this inspection was 7.25 hours and was a key unannounced inspection. The Manager, one senior support worker and one service user were spoken to and records were inspected. There was also a tour of the premises. The service user spoken to was case tracked so as to determine the quality of service from their perspective. This service user’s verbal skills were limited as were those of the other two service users. This inspection focussed on all the key standards and on the progress made towards achieving the requirements and recommendations made at the last inspection. The preinspection questionnaire was reviewed prior to this inspection. What the service does well: What has improved since the last inspection? What they could do better: The Home should ensure that further documentation is available in order to further improve levels of Health and Safety and the quality assurance system. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 6 Please contact the provider for advice of actions taken in response to this inspection. The report of this inspection is available from enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk or by contacting your local CSCI office. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 7 DETAILS OF INSPECTOR FINDINGS CONTENTS Choice of Home (Standards 1–5) Individual Needs and Choices (Standards 6-10) Lifestyle (Standards 11-17) Personal and Healthcare Support (Standards 18-21) Concerns, Complaints and Protection (Standards 22-23) Environment (Standards 24-30) Staffing (Standards 31-36) Conduct and Management of the Home (Standards 37 – 43) Scoring of Outcomes Statutory Requirements Identified During the Inspection Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 8 Choice of Home The intended outcomes for Standards 1 – 5 are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Prospective service users have the information they need to make an informed choice about where to live. Prospective users’ individual aspirations and needs are assessed. Prospective service users know that the home that they will choose will meet their needs and aspirations. Prospective service users have an opportunity to visit and to “test drive” the home. Each service user has an individual written contract or statement of terms and conditions with the home. The Commission consider Standard 2 the key standard to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 2 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users had their needs assessed before admission to the Home so that staff could provide individually tailored care. EVIDENCE: The three service users have lived in this Home for several years. A full assessment of these service users’ needs was made prior to their admission, as confirmed by detailed examination of care records at a previous inspection. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 9 Individual Needs and Choices The intended outcomes for Standards 6 – 10 are: 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Service users know their assessed and changing needs and personal goals are reflected in their individual Plan. Service users make decisions about their lives with assistance as needed. Service users are consulted on, and participate in, all aspects of life in the home. Service users are supported to take risks as part of an independent lifestyle. Service users know that information about them is handled appropriately, and that their confidences are kept. The Commission considers Standards 6, 7 and 9 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 6,7 & 9 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users’ needs and personal goals were reflected in an excellent range of written care plans. They were enabled and supported to make choices and take responsible risks in order to increase their independence. EVIDENCE: Each service user had a wide range of written Support Plans, reflecting individual needs and covering topics such as behaviour, in-house activities, personal hygiene and accessing medical support. These were comprehensive and informed staff as to what to do with service users and what not to do. They were all up to date. This care planning system was commendable. The senior support worker, who was spoken to, gave examples of how service users made choices by, for example, pointing at an object or taking the hand of a member of staff. She said that choices given to service users were normally limited to two so as not to confuse them. This worker also gave examples of how staff enable service users to take responsible risks as part of their developing independence. She said that Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 10 service users’ use of public facilities, such as the swimming pool, is potentially risky to them and the public but written risk assessments address these situations so that they can experience a normal lifestyle. She went on to say that the case tracked service user runs the bath and gets undressed without staff help and then is left to ‘have a soak’ in private. Staff then return to wash the service user’s hair. The case tracked service user’s written risk assessments were examined – they were wide ranging and recently reviewed. They included a column headed ‘What are the benefits from taking the risk’. This was considered very good practice. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 11 Lifestyle The intended outcomes for Standards 11 - 17 are: 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Service users have opportunities for personal development. Service users are able to take part in age, peer and culturally appropriate activities. Service users are part of the local community. Service users engage in appropriate leisure activities. Service users have appropriate personal, family and sexual relationships. Service users’ rights are respected and responsibilities recognised in their daily lives. Service users are offered a healthy diet and enjoy their meals and mealtimes. The Commission considers Standards 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 12,13,15,16 & 17 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were involved in fulfilling and age-appropriate activities within the Home and in the local community. They were able to maintain appropriate family relationships and were provided with a healthy personalised diet. Daily routines reflected their individual choice and promoted independence. EVIDENCE: Each of the three service users were attending day services. The case tracked service user had a ‘personal day’ each Friday which was less structured than the other week days, the Manager explained. The senior support worker, who was spoken to, described how service users show they value the activities they are involved in. She said the case tracked service user giggles during an enjoyable activity and showed pride in his face when recently giving a painting, made at day services, to care staff. The senior support worker said that service users go out into the local community both individually with staff and as a group. Local shops are used Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 12 for personal shopping, as well as pubs, hairdressers, dentist and optician, for example. Risk assessments were in place to reflect these activities. The case tracked service user had regular family contact through visits to the Home and visits to relatives. The other service users had no family contact. They all had friends at their day service, said the senior support worker. She supported this statement by saying that the case tracked service user occasionally uses the names of other day service users in conversation at the Home. The senior support worker provided examples of the Home promoting service users’ independence through everyday routines such as cleaning their bedrooms, cooking, making coffee and taking visits out. She added that they always have the option not to undertake an activity. On the case tracked service user’s ‘personal day’ a late rising is normal – between 10 & 10.30am – followed by shopping in the morning and a recreational pursuit in the afternoon. Service users were being provided with privacy locks on the bathroom doors and key-operated locks on their bedroom doors. The Home was sensitive to those service users who preferred to keep their bedroom doors open and to one service user who liked the curtains drawn. The Home’s menu was examined and was found to provide service users with a balanced and nutritious diet. The menu included a hot evening meal which service users ate in addition to their cooked meal at day services. The case tracked service user may, with staff support, prepare a ‘pack up’ for eating at day services, the Manager said. Food stocks were at a good level. Service users’ preferences as to where they ate their meal were met. The case tracked service user sometimes chooses to eat at a table in the garden during the warmer months, the Manager said. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 13 Personal and Healthcare Support The intended outcomes for Standards 18 - 21 are: 18. 19. 20. 21. Service users receive personal support in the way they prefer and require. Service users’ physical and emotional health needs are met. Service users retain, administer and control their own medication where appropriate, and are protected by the home’s policies and procedures for dealing with medicines. The ageing, illness and death of a service user are handled with respect and as the individual would wish. The Commission considers Standards 18, 19, and 20 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 18,19 & 20 Quality in this outcome area is excellent. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were receiving personal support in the way they preferred and required. Their health needs were being well met in an individualised way and they were being protected by the Home’s procedures for dealing with medicines. EVIDENCE: The Manager said that each service user has a reasonable degree of understanding and one is aware of a limited range of Makaton signs, although chooses not to use these. This service user’s care plan showed how communication issues were addressed, in a comprehensive and detailed way. One member of care staff was attending a monthly ‘communications’ group together with staff from other United Response homes. The senior support worker spoke of the importance of telling service users what she was doing before doing it – for example, before pouring water over a service user’s head following shampooing. Service users’ likes and dislikes were recorded on file. A notice regarding ‘Peaks and Dales Advocacy Service’ was displayed on the office wall. Service users were being individually supported in a commendable way. There was evidence of service users’ sexual, emotional and physical health needs being met on an individualised level. One service user, who has Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 14 epilepsy, had a book containing a range of pictures that can be used by hospital staff to communicate with the service user if admitted following seizures. The case tracked service user’s Support Plan on ‘Accessing Medical Support’ gave a good overview of guidance to meet personal health needs. Following another service user’s hospital operation a useful communications system, comprising hand-drawn pictures of happy and sad faces – was devised. This enabled the service user to point to the faces to indicate level of pain felt so that pain-killers could be administered if necessary. Photographs of the hospital had been used to inform and reassure this service user prior to an admission. This service user’s file provided good levels of detail regarding personal health issues. The senior support worker described a range of external health professionals involved with service users. The Manager said there was a very good relationship with the local Community Learning Disabilities Team (CLDT). She said the CLDT workers act as good advocates for the service users regarding their health needs and have provided training to care staff. The Manager said that ‘Ash Green Advocacy Service’ was providing an advocate for one service user to address issues of consent regarding the use of weights to improve muscle tone. The way that the Home was meeting individual health needs is commendable. Medication was securely stored with photographs of each service user displayed beside their respective set of medicines. The Medication Administration Record (MAR) sheet folder contained further photos of each service user and a copy of ‘Birchgrove Medication Procedures’. The MAR sheets were examined and found to be satisfactory. A sheet displayed in the office indicated that the Home had been made aware, by the pharmacist, of the need to provide two signatures and dates beside all handwritten entries. There was no record of staff signatures/initials to cross-reference any uncertain entries on MAR sheets against. ‘As and when required’ (prn) medicines were administered and good practice was being followed in this area. No controlled drugs were being used. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 15 Concerns, Complaints and Protection The intended outcomes for Standards 22 – 23 are: 22. 23. Service users feel their views are listened to and acted on. Service users are protected from abuse, neglect and self-harm. The Commission considers Standards 22, and 23 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 22 & 23 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were benefiting from the Home’s complaints policy and procedures and were being protected from abuse. EVIDENCE: The Home’s complaints procedure was displayed in the entrance hall. There was also a complaints leaflet utilising symbols and pictures to help service users to understand the concept of making a complaint. The Manager said there had never been any complaints made about the Home’s services. It was noted that the Home had no procedure for recording a complaint. The Manager was advised to use a specific form with appropriate headings. This would ensure that all relevant information was recorded. The senior support worker confirmed she had been provided with training on ‘Safeguarding Adults’ to ensure understanding of adult abuse matters. The Manager confirmed that all staff had had this training. The Home’s Complaints Procedure was satisfactory as was its ‘Whistle Blowing’ Policy. The Manager said that staff have ‘whistle-blowed’ in the past and she always draws their attention to United Response’s position on ensuring that staff are, supported, and not penalised for such action. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 16 Environment The intended outcomes for Standards 24 – 30 are: 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. Service users live in a homely, comfortable and safe environment. Service users’ bedrooms suit their needs and lifestyles. Service users’ bedrooms promote their independence. Service users’ toilets and bathrooms provide sufficient privacy and meet their individual needs. Shared spaces complement and supplement service users’ individual rooms. Service users have the specialist equipment they require to maximise their independence. The home is clean and hygienic. The Commission considers Standards 24, and 30 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were living in a homely and safe environment that was clean and hygienic. EVIDENCE: The accommodation was a spacious bungalow that was homely, attractively decorated and well furnished. Service users bedrooms were nicely personalised although one was less so. This decision had been taken following advice from the CLDT to reduce visual stimuli due to the service user’s epilepsy. Wall tapestries in muted colours were planned for this room. The case tracked service user’s room had a number of posters displayed that had been personally chosen by the service user, the Manager said. Appropriate and sensitive strategies had been followed to maintain a homely feel to the Home in the context of service users’ challenging behaviour. The wooden flooring in the dining room made the room sound ‘bright’ and ways of making the room sound ‘warmer’ were discussed with the Manager. Lockable cupboards had been provided in two service users’ bedrooms – there were appropriate reasons for not providing them in the third bedroom. A lawn and separate gravelled area, outside, were surrounded by fencing to provide security for service users. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 17 During a tour of the premises the Home was found to be clean and hygienic with no unpleasant odours. The washing machine in the laundry room had a sluicing programme and the Manager and the senior support worker described good practice regarding the transportation of soiled materials such as wet bedding. However, there was no policy to address this matter within the Home’s written policies or risk assessments. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 18 Staffing The intended outcomes for Standards 31 – 36 are: 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. Service users benefit from clarity of staff roles and responsibilities. Service users are supported by competent and qualified staff. Service users are supported by an effective staff team. Service users are supported and protected by the home’s recruitment policy and practices. Service users’ individual and joint needs are met by appropriately trained staff. Service users benefit from well supported and supervised staff. The Commission considers Standards 32, 34 and 35 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 32,34 & 35 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were being supported by a well-trained staff group and protected by the Home’s recruitment procedures. EVIDENCE: 83 of the care staff had achieved a National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) to level 2 or above. This met the National Minimum Standard to maintain a staff group with at least 50 qualified staff. The file of a member of care staff appointed in March 2005 was examined. It was found to contain most of the elements, required by current Regulations, regarding recruitment practices. However, there was no photograph of the staff member on file and no evidence that a Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) disclosure had been applied for and received. In view of the usually good recruitment practices followed by United Response the Inspector accepted the Manager’s opinion that these items had been in place and had become missing. There was evidence of this same member of staff being provided with induction training to Learning Disability Award Framework (LDAF) standards, as recommended by Standard 35. The senior support worker confirmed that new staff were provided with LDAF induction. Training records showed that all staff had been provided with all mandatory training and the pre-inspection Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 19 questionnaire detailed a number of other courses undertaken by staff that addressed the individual needs of service users. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 20 Conduct and Management of the Home The intended outcomes for Standards 37 – 43 are: 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. Service users benefit from a well run home. Service users benefit from the ethos, leadership and management approach of the home. Service users are confident their views underpin all self-monitoring, review and development by the home. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s policies and procedures. Service users’ rights and best interests are safeguarded by the home’s record keeping policies and procedures. The health, safety and welfare of service users are promoted and protected. Service users benefit from competent and accountable management of the service. The Commission considers Standards 37, 39, and 42 the key standards to be inspected at least once during a 12 month period. JUDGEMENT – we looked at outcomes for the following standard(s): 37,39 &42 Quality in this outcome area is good. This judgement has been made using available evidence including a visit to this service. Service users were benefiting from a well run home and their health and safety was generally being fully promoted. They were not fully benefiting from an effective quality assurance system. EVIDENCE: The Manager had achieved her Registered Manager’s Award at National Vocational Qualification (NVQ) level 4, in 2002, and had worked with people with learning disabilities for 26 years. She said her post was now additional to the staffing establishment, which enables her to better assess staff skills. The senior support worker said the best thing about this Home was that it is relaxed and friendly. The Inspector was able to support this statement from his own observations during this inspection. Other aspects of standard 38 were not assessed on this occasion. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 21 There was evidence of only three monthly independent audit visits to the Home on behalf of the Registered Provider, as required by Regulation 26, having been undertaken in 2006. The last recorded monthly audit was in July 2006 but the Manager stated that others had taken place. There was no current annual plan for the Home. Quality assurance questionnaires, to assess opinions on the quality of service provided by the Home, were completed by staff in 2004 and by service users in 2006. The Manager said that a new draft questionnaire, for completion by service users and their relatives and by external professionals, had been developed. Good food hygiene practices, and safe storage of cleaning materials, were observed. However, there were no Product Information Sheets in the Home, in respect of the cleaning materials, as required by the Control Of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations. The Manager explained that these were at the United Response Area Office for typing and agreed that a handwritten copy of these should have been kept in the Home as a temporary measure. Written risk assessments for the Home’s environment were examined and found to be satisfactory. Weekly fire alarm tests were recorded as well as at least two fire drills a year. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 22 SCORING OF OUTCOMES This page summarises the assessment of the extent to which the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes for Adults 18-65 have been met and uses the following scale. The scale ranges from: 4 Standard Exceeded 2 Standard Almost Met (Commendable) (Minor Shortfalls) 3 Standard Met 1 Standard Not Met (No Shortfalls) (Major Shortfalls) “X” in the standard met box denotes standard not assessed on this occasion “N/A” in the standard met box denotes standard not applicable CHOICE OF HOME Standard No Score 1 X 2 3 3 X 4 X 5 X INDIVIDUAL NEEDS AND CHOICES Standard No 6 7 8 9 10 Score CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS Standard No Score 22 3 23 3 ENVIRONMENT Standard No Score 24 3 25 X 26 X 27 X 28 X 29 X 30 3 STAFFING Standard No Score 31 X 32 3 33 X 34 3 35 3 36 X CONDUCT AND MANAGEMENT OF THE HOME Standard No 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 Score 4 3 X 3 X LIFESTYLES Standard No Score 11 X 12 3 13 3 14 X 15 3 16 3 17 3 PERSONAL AND HEALTHCARE SUPPORT Standard No 18 19 20 21 Score 4 4 3 X 3 X 3 X X 3 X Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 23 No Are there any outstanding requirements from the last inspection? STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS This section sets out the actions, which must be taken so that the registered person/s meets the Care Standards Act 2000, Care Homes Regulations 2001 and the National Minimum Standards. The Registered Provider(s) must comply with the given timescales. No. Standard Regulation Requirement Timescale for action RECOMMENDATIONS These recommendations relate to National Minimum Standards and are seen as good practice for the Registered Provider/s to consider carrying out. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Refer to Standard YA20 YA22 YA30 YA34 YA39 Good Practice Recommendations A record of staff signatures/initials should be provided to cross-reference any uncertain entries on MAR sheets against. A specific form should be used on which to record complaints. The transportation of soiled materials such as wet bedding should be addressed by means of a written policy or risk assessment. All documents required by Regulation to be in place prior to staff appointment should be maintained at the Home at all times. Monthly independent audit visits to the Home on behalf of the Registered Provider, as required by Regulation 26, should take place and records of these maintained in the Home at all times. The Home should develop an annual plan for 2006/7. Cleaning material Product Information Sheets should be kept in the Home as required by the Control Of Substances DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 24 6. 7. YA39 YA42 Birchgrove Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations. Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 25 Commission for Social Care Inspection Derbyshire Area Office Cardinal Square Nottingham Road Derby DE1 3QT National Enquiry Line: 0845 015 0120 Email: enquiries@csci.gsi.gov.uk Web: www.csci.org.uk © This report is copyright Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) and may only be used in its entirety. Extracts may not be used or reproduced without the express permission of CSCI Birchgrove DS0000019938.V315832.R01.S.doc Version 5.2 Page 26 - Please note that this information is included on www.bestcarehome.co.uk under license from the regulator. Re-publishing this information is in breach of the terms of use of that website. Discrete codes and changes have been inserted throughout the textual data shown on the site that will provide incontrovertable proof of copying in the event this information is re-published on other websites. The policy of www.bestcarehome.co.uk is to use all legal avenues to pursue such offenders, including recovery of costs. You have been warned!